When the world has abundant food and energy, the left will force us to have less, and create scarcity....

[2aguy]

A look at the movie "Soylent Green," and the environmental movement of the 1970s that created it......everything the movie predicted failed to happen, of course, and in fact, the exact opposite has happened....

That is why the left is attacking oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy, and why they are attacking our food supply............we didn't naturally end up with an environmental catastrophe, so now they have to create it....

It was 50 years ago that the movie Soylent Green came out. Set in 2022 (50 years after the movie was filmed, 49 since it was released), it portrayed a world on the brink of collapse. Grossly overpopulated with 7 billion people (a billion less than were on Earth in 2022), there was no longer any room, any food, any sea life, or any respect for human rights. Global warming was destroying everything.


A tiny oligarchy ruled over a population stripped of their basic humanity whose source of sustenance was reduced to tasteless crackers of Soylent Green–which, famously, was made of the processed corpses of people who had been euthanized.

The story itself is irrelevant; its cultural impact derived from its presentation of the dominant view of the future as presented by the intellectual elite. The future was filled with misery and death due to the depredations wrought by a consumerist capitalist society raping the Earth.
===========
It was a pretty bad prediction of the future, all things considered. With the Green Revolution food production has far outstripped population growth. The availability of fresh fruit and vegetables, meat, luxury goods, living space have all expanded. Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. If you transported a person from the movie premier in 1973 to 2023, they would see a paradise around them, not the dystopia that Soylent Green predicted.
======
Paul Ehrlich is still revered, the pessimists now run everything in our society, and children are indoctrinated to believe that the world portrayed by Soylent Green is in our future. As I said, the special effects are better and the stories more sophisticated, but the same basic themes are being promoted today.

Dystopia: Soylent Green 50 years later

The 1970s was a pessimistic decade. America’s mood was foul. If you asked almost anybody what the future held, the answer would be: decline. The Vietnam war was still tearing the country apart,...

hotair.com

 

[MarathonMike]

Democrats and Leftists in general are all about control of the masses. They do it with vaccines, food, energy, media etc. Just observe what they do, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

 

[2aguy]

Democrats and Leftists in general are all about control of the masses. They do it with vaccines, food, energy, media etc. Just observe what they do, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

Yes........they are truly dangerous to free people everywhere....

 

[Moonglow]

We already have abundant food and energy and have for many years.

 

[alang1216]

A look at the movie "Soylent Green," and the environmental movement of the 1970s that created it......everything the movie predicted failed to happen, of course, and in fact, the exact opposite has happened....

That is why the left is attacking oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy, and why they are attacking our food supply............we didn't naturally end up with an environmental catastrophe, so now they have to create it....

It was 50 years ago that the movie Soylent Green came out. Set in 2022 (50 years after the movie was filmed, 49 since it was released), it portrayed a world on the brink of collapse. Grossly overpopulated with 7 billion people (a billion less than were on Earth in 2022), there was no longer any room, any food, any sea life, or any respect for human rights. Global warming was destroying everything.


A tiny oligarchy ruled over a population stripped of their basic humanity whose source of sustenance was reduced to tasteless crackers of Soylent Green–which, famously, was made of the processed corpses of people who had been euthanized.

The story itself is irrelevant; its cultural impact derived from its presentation of the dominant view of the future as presented by the intellectual elite. The future was filled with misery and death due to the depredations wrought by a consumerist capitalist society raping the Earth.
===========
It was a pretty bad prediction of the future, all things considered. With the Green Revolution food production has far outstripped population growth. The availability of fresh fruit and vegetables, meat, luxury goods, living space have all expanded. Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. If you transported a person from the movie premier in 1973 to 2023, they would see a paradise around them, not the dystopia that Soylent Green predicted.
======
Paul Ehrlich is still revered, the pessimists now run everything in our society, and children are indoctrinated to believe that the world portrayed by Soylent Green is in our future. As I said, the special effects are better and the stories more sophisticated, but the same basic themes are being promoted today.

Dystopia: Soylent Green 50 years later

The 1970s was a pessimistic decade. America’s mood was foul. If you asked almost anybody what the future held, the answer would be: decline. The Vietnam war was still tearing the country apart,...

hotair.com

Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. But not the whole world. That abundance is not the case in many places and many of those places are very vulnerable to any climate change. I'm not a pessimist but I would like to see and end to hunger sooner rather than later.

 

[MarathonMike]

Yes........they are truly dangerous to free people everywhere....

I have no idea how any American can support Democrats/Leftists.

 

[MarathonMike]

Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. But not the whole world. That abundance is not the case in many places and many of those places are very vulnerable to any climate change. I'm not a pessimist but I would like to see and end to hunger sooner rather than later.

I agree that much of the world suffers in crushing poverty. I believe it's possible to greatly improve food scarcity but not without serious population control initiatives in 3rd world countries. It is insane to me that dirt poor people have 3 or 4 kids per family. How about vasectomies after one or two kids like many men do in 1st world countries?

 

[surada]

I agree that much of the world suffers in crushing poverty. I believe it's possible to greatly improve food scarcity but not without serious population control initiatives in 3rd world countries. It is insane to me that dirt poor people have 3 or 4 kids per family. How about vasectomies after one or two kids like many men do in 1st world countries?

You want to enforce that?

 

[MarathonMike]

You want to enforce that?

Absolutely. Vasectomies for food relief. That would actually IMPROVE the 3rd world situation instead of the mindless "humanitarian" efforts that do nothing but perpetuate the misery. What have you got?

 

[2aguy]

Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. But not the whole world. That abundance is not the case in many places and many of those places are very vulnerable to any climate change. I'm not a pessimist but I would like to see and end to hunger sooner rather than later.

Wrong.... they are vulnerable to corrupt and incompetent government.... the only reason they dont have enough food and energy....

Thwre is enough food and ful for every human on the planet....leftism and its corruption, greed and incompetence create starvation and lack of energy.

Our system.....capitalism and limits in government power have, in the past, enabledmour abundance....sadly, as the left becomesnmore powerful here, we too are losing tht abundance

 

[2aguy]

I agree that much of the world suffers in crushing poverty. I believe it's possible to greatly improve food scarcity but not without serious population control initiatives in 3rd world countries. It is insane to me that dirt poor people have 3 or 4 kids per family. How about vasectomies after one or two kids like many men do in 1st world countries?

If the western countries would simply stop the handouts to 3rd world dictators and stop blocking the ability of 3rd world countries to use real energy resources, those countries would get out of their 3rd orld status....

wealthy countries have fewer children all on thir own........

Notice it is the left, again, is the cause of their problems

 

[MarathonMike]

If the western countries would simply stop the handouts to 3rd world dictators and stop blocking the ability of 3rd world countries to use real energy resources, those countries would get out of their 3rd orld status....

wealthy countries have fewer children all on thir own........

Notice it is the left, again, is the cause of their problems

Perpetuating misery is what Leftists do all over the world. That is true whether it's Democrats in America or Globalist pukes around the world.

 

[jackflash]

A look at the movie "Soylent Green," and the environmental movement of the 1970s that created it......everything the movie predicted failed to happen, of course, and in fact, the exact opposite has happened....

That is why the left is attacking oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy, and why they are attacking our food supply............we didn't naturally end up with an environmental catastrophe, so now they have to create it....

It was 50 years ago that the movie Soylent Green came out. Set in 2022 (50 years after the movie was filmed, 49 since it was released), it portrayed a world on the brink of collapse. Grossly overpopulated with 7 billion people (a billion less than were on Earth in 2022), there was no longer any room, any food, any sea life, or any respect for human rights. Global warming was destroying everything.


A tiny oligarchy ruled over a population stripped of their basic humanity whose source of sustenance was reduced to tasteless crackers of Soylent Green–which, famously, was made of the processed corpses of people who had been euthanized.

The story itself is irrelevant; its cultural impact derived from its presentation of the dominant view of the future as presented by the intellectual elite. The future was filled with misery and death due to the depredations wrought by a consumerist capitalist society raping the Earth.
===========
It was a pretty bad prediction of the future, all things considered. With the Green Revolution food production has far outstripped population growth. The availability of fresh fruit and vegetables, meat, luxury goods, living space have all expanded. Abundance, not scarcity, defines our world. If you transported a person from the movie premier in 1973 to 2023, they would see a paradise around them, not the dystopia that Soylent Green predicted.
======
Paul Ehrlich is still revered, the pessimists now run everything in our society, and children are indoctrinated to believe that the world portrayed by Soylent Green is in our future. As I said, the special effects are better and the stories more sophisticated, but the same basic themes are being promoted today.

Dystopia: Soylent Green 50 years later

The 1970s was a pessimistic decade. America’s mood was foul. If you asked almost anybody what the future held, the answer would be: decline. The Vietnam war was still tearing the country apart,...

hotair.com

Scarcity = power & control to the elitist mindset which is based in narcissism. The religion of environmentalism is the preferred tool in acquiring the elitist dream of dreams, a one world without borders. Below are a couple of vids, the first one delves into the world of sociopathic behavior & the nine symptoms of narcissism. The second vid centers more upon the issue of psychopaths & their behavioral symptoms.

Both vids are from a three part series on egomania/narcissism. It also helps to understand that there are five types of narcissism, Overt, Covert, Antagonistic, Communal & last but not least Malignant narcissism.

 

[alang1216]

I agree that much of the world suffers in crushing poverty. I believe it's possible to greatly improve food scarcity but not without serious population control initiatives in 3rd world countries. It is insane to me that dirt poor people have 3 or 4 kids per family. How about vasectomies after one or two kids like many men do in 1st world countries?

Dirt poor have fewer options for family planning and healthcare. I don't know the numbers but I bet the infant mortality is significantly higher and retirement options are not. You have to have enough surviving children to care for you in your old age.

 

[alang1216]

Wrong.... they are vulnerable to corrupt and incompetent government.... the only reason they dont have enough food and energy....

Thwre is enough food and ful for every human on the planet....leftism and its corruption, greed and incompetence create starvation and lack of energy.

Our system.....capitalism and limits in government power have, in the past, enabledmour abundance....sadly, as the left becomesnmore powerful here, we too are losing tht abundance

Lucky for me my abundance has not suffered any but there is some truth in what you say. A good part of the blame though has to be placed on the West's conquest and colonialization of large parts of the world and its negative impacts. Had the African nations been allowed to develop on their own they'd be at a much higher level of political maturity.

 

[2aguy]

Lucky for me my abundance has not suffered any but there is some truth in what you say. A good part of the blame though has to be placed on the West's conquest and colonialization of large parts of the world and its negative impacts. Had the African nations been allowed to develop on their own they'd be at a much higher level of political maturity.

Wrong....it is the current left wing meddling in Africa that is keeping them down...... the refusal to allow these countries to use fossil fuels for energy, their propping up of dictators ....that is hurting those countries.......

Blaming colonialism is simply a way to excuse and justify current left wing exploitation of those countries

 

[2aguy]

Dirt poor have fewer options for family planning and healthcare. I don't know the numbers but I bet the infant mortality is significantly higher and retirement options are not. You have to have enough surviving children to care for you in your old age.

And you dont get theae countries out of their poverty by denying them access to plentiful, cheap energy..

 

[alang1216]

And you dont get theae countries out of their poverty by denying them access to plentiful, cheap energy..

Oil is expensive, that is why most Nigerian oil is exported, it does not stay in Africa.

 

[2aguy]

Oil is expensive, that is why most Nigerian oil is exported, it does not stay in Africa.

It is exported to make profits for the corrupt government, and the westerners who bring it out of the ground.

The left in the western industrialized countries are doing all they can to prevent African countries from having access to cheap energy...

 

[2aguy]

Oil is expensive, that is why most Nigerian oil is exported, it does not stay in Africa.

The left doesn't want energy to be cheap, reliable, or plentiful......access to more and more cheap, reliable, plentiful energy drives leftists nuttier than they normally are...

Instead, the focus of attention has now shifted to Africa, where energy use is still very low—and where rich countries see an opportunity to apply pressure by leveraging development aid and cutting off finance. This is already leading to harmful policies that will hurt millions of poor Africans by slowing down their continent’s economic development while doing little, if anything, to help fight climate change.
Fears of a fossil fuel boom in low-income but fast-growing regions such as Africa are cited as the rationale for imposing new bans on financing for such investments. At this year’s U.N. Climate Change Conference, or COP26, the United States, Britain, and other countries pledged to end international financing of fossil fuel projects. The key word here is “international.” While barring public finance for oil and gas projects in other countries, Britain continues to subsidize its own fossil industry, while the United States—already the world’s biggest oil producer—plans to increaseits own domestic production. But even if we ignore Western hypocrisy and take their promises of rapid carbon reduction at face value, is there any rational reason to worry about African nations blowing up the world’s carbon budget? A closer look suggests no.

Why the Climate Panic About Africa Is Wrong

Once again, the rich world sees Africans as a threat to the planet.

foreignpolicy.com